Good, long read on ISIS, Salafism, jihad

[gr8indoorsman]

Re: db, you cannot be that dense.

Originally posted by Purdue85:

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:
I am not defending ISIS in any way, however I don't have to think very hard to draw parallels between ISIS' subjugative tactics and the Inquisition.

This post was edited on 2/19 12:21 AM by gr8indoorsman

And that was the entire point of bringing up the Crusades and Inquisition... to defend what ISIS is doing. There was no other reason to go back hundreds of years to something even "The One" doesn't understand.

So, it's not possible to discuss parallels without defending something? The Inquisition was indefensible, just as ISIS's actions are, so I'm not sure how you draw that silly conclusion unless you think the Inquisition was OK.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Originally posted by Purdue85:

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:

Originally posted by Purdue85:

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:
The author surmises that we must wait them out, aiding their demise along the way, rather than engaging them directly in a ground war. I am inclined to agree, but there really isn't a good answer.

Wait them out. Well, while we're waiting, they're butchering.

That could work ... as long as they don't kill your family and friends in the meantime.

Of course, while we're waiting, they're not standing still.

Apparently, you don't understand that their brutality is as likely to be their undoing as anything else. Do you really think putting American troops on the ground to combat them is the right answer? Really? Did you even read the linked article?

No, once again it's you who doesn't understand. Their brutality is increasing, not "undoing" them. Apparently you don't understand that.

Where did I suggest "putting American troops on the ground to combat them is the right answer"? (Hint: I didn't. Apparently you don't understand that.)

Increasing brutality is unrelated to it being their undoing. Volume has nothing to do with it.

So what's your proposed solution since you obviously don't agree with "wait them out"? I read a lot of complaints, but not a lot of ideas from you. Obviously, you didn't read the article like I asked, you just want to complain without being informed.

This post was edited on 2/21 4:54 PM by gr8indoorsman

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Re: Hey that was a great link

The article alludes to the possibilities of uniting the two Sunni extremist groups, and wonders why the hell Obama tried to pair an AQ leader with ISIS to try to get ISIS to settle down. That does seem silly to me.

Thing about it is, you already have distinct sects in Islam. The Schism happened when the religion was formed. Sunnis are not going to abide Shia, and Shia are not going to tolerate a Sunni caliphate as a regional power. There's already an awful lot of tension between the premier governmental powers in the region: KSA and Iran, both of which are nearly entirely populated by one side or the other. Now, sandwiched in between the two most powerful Shiite countries you've got this Sunni caliphate, and the major Sunni-based power in the region views that caliphate as a threat. It's not a teneable situation for long, unless: 1) AQ joins up with ISIS; 2) The caliphate becomes a stable governing body able to provide a better life than the governments.

I think the second is unlikely to happen as their barbarism and subjugation continue to escalate.

 

[Purdue85]

Re: db, you cannot be that dense.

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:

Originally posted by Purdue85:

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:
I am not defending ISIS in any way, however I don't have to think very hard to draw parallels between ISIS' subjugative tactics and the Inquisition.

This post was edited on 2/19 12:21 AM by gr8indoorsman

And that was the entire point of bringing up the Crusades and Inquisition... to defend what ISIS is doing. There was no other reason to go back hundreds of years to something even "The One" doesn't understand.

So, it's not possible to discuss parallels without defending something? The Inquisition was indefensible, just as ISIS's actions are, so I'm not sure how you draw that silly conclusion unless you think the Inquisition was OK.

The Inquisition was what?

The Crusades were in response to what?

And, the fact that you and "The One" choose to discuss it in the context of what is happening TODAY is quite telling. Repulsive, but telling.

 

[Purdue85]

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:

Originally posted by Purdue85:

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:

Originally posted by Purdue85:

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:
The author surmises that we must wait them out, aiding their demise along the way, rather than engaging them directly in a ground war. I am inclined to agree, but there really isn't a good answer.

Wait them out. Well, while we're waiting, they're butchering.

That could work ... as long as they don't kill your family and friends in the meantime.

Of course, while we're waiting, they're not standing still.

Apparently, you don't understand that their brutality is as likely to be their undoing as anything else. Do you really think putting American troops on the ground to combat them is the right answer? Really? Did you even read the linked article?

No, once again it's you who doesn't understand. Their brutality is increasing, not "undoing" them. Apparently you don't understand that.

Where did I suggest "putting American troops on the ground to combat them is the right answer"? (Hint: I didn't. Apparently you don't understand that.)

Increasing brutality is unrelated to it being their undoing. Volume has nothing to do with it.

So what's your proposed solution since you obviously don't agree with "wait them out"? I read a lot of complaints, but not a lot of ideas from you. Obviously, you didn't read the article like I asked, you just want to complain without being informed.

This post was edited on 2/21 4:54 PM by gr8indoorsman

My position is and has been clear. People who say "wait them out" are enabling the beheading and ongoing brutality of these barbarians.

There are many options, but to "wait them out" is to give a collective *yawn* at their brutality.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Still waiting to hear a proposed solution...

And no, my position isn't as simple as "wait them out."

 

[Purdue97]

Re: Hey that was a great link

Well, the one thing I will say is that there are approximately 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, of which the majority(75-90%) are Sunni. Roughly 3.5% of Muslims believe in Salafism. They are also all Sunni. That comes out to about 55,000,000 people.

When one looks at a map and does a quick look on how they are dispersed it really shows the issue. If they get to big and to strong, with the high percentage of Sunni's through the peninsula, up into Egypt and Syria, this could turn into a much worse situation. This really needs to be dealt with aggressively. With my experiences there Muslims are loyal to their religion then their/family and tribe(if it applies) above all else.

It would be interesting to find out if Salafism has an area where it dominates, or if it is just spread out among Sunnis throughout the Muslim world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam#mediaviewer/File:Madhhab_Map3.png

 

[Purdue85]

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:
Still waiting to hear a proposed solution...

And no, my position isn't as simple as "wait them out."

Okay. So, provide one!

Waiting to be the last one "eaten" isn't a viable strategy. In my humble opinion, of course...

If you have something other than "waiting them out", I'd love to see it. Otherwise, you're posturing.